2007 (7) TMI 231

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'):- "5.1 "Whether the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) by treating the inaction and/or lack of application of mind by the A.O.  on a particular issue as the view (decision) of the Revenue and hold the same against it". 5.2 "Whether on the acts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in not deciding the appeal on merits and dismissing the same on technical grounds and thus deviated from the guidelines set out by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT, Vs. M/s Abhishek Industries Ltd., Ludhiana [2006] 286 ITR 1 in ITA No.110 of 2005 that once the matter is before the Cour....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ddition, it has also been held that for the assessment year 1982-1983 no penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated and once the department has accepted the order in the previous year then it has to act in the same fashion even for the subsequent years. In that regard, reliance has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT, (2004) 266 ITR 99 and Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT, (1992) 193 ITR 321. The Tribunal has also relied upon other judgments of various High Courts and concluded as under:- "On the basis of above referred decisions, it becomes abundantly clear that there must be a valid and just cause for the Revenue for taking different view in the su....